From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bernardino v. Walmart, Inc.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Aug 17, 2023
2:23-cv-00823-JCM-NJK (D. Nev. Aug. 17, 2023)

Opinion

2:23-cv-00823-JCM-NJK

08-17-2023

LUIS BERNARDINO, Plaintiff, v. WALMART INC., Defendant.


ORDER [DOCKET NO. 14]

Nancy J. Koppe United States Magistrate Judge

Pending before the Court is the parties' stipulation to extend discovery deadlines. Docket No. 14.

A request to extend discovery deadlines must include a statement specifying the discovery completed, a specific description of the discovery that remains, the reasons why the subject deadline cannot be met, and a proposed schedule for completing the outstanding discovery. Local Rule 26-3. The request must also be supported by a showing of good cause. Id. The good cause analysis turns on whether the subject deadlines cannot reasonably be met despite the exercise of diligence. Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). This showing of diligence is measured by the movant's conduct throughout the entire period of time already allowed. CC. Mexicano. US, LLC v. Aero IIA viation, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169110, at *11-12 (D. Nev. Dec. 15, 2015). If diligence is not established, the Court's inquiry should end. Johnson, 975 F.2d at 609 (internal citation omitted).

Here the parties have not demonstrated diligence. This case has been pending since April 14, 2023. Docket No. 1-2 at 1. In the over four months since this case was filed, the only discovery the parties have conducted is the propounding of a single set of written discovery requests on the other side. Docket No. 14 at 2. Such minimal discovery conducted does not constitute diligence. Further, the deadline to amend the pleadings expired on August 8, 2023. Docket No. 11 at 1. However, the parties do not explain why their failure to move to extend the deadline to amend the pleadings prior to the deadline's expiration is result of excusable neglect. See Docket No. 14. Despite the parties' minimal showing, as a one-time courtesy to the parties, the Court will grant a lesser extension to the discovery deadlines that have not yet passed in this case. Accordingly, the parties' stipulation to extend discovery deadlines is GRANTED in part. Docket No. 14. The scheduling order is MODIFIED as follows:

Initial Experts:

January 31, 2024

Rebuttal Experts:

March 1, 2024

Discovery Cut-Off

April 1, 2024

Dispositive Motions:

May 1, 2024

Joint Pretrial Order:

May 31, 2024, 30 days after the resolution of dispositive motions, or further Court order.

Given the length of the instant extension being granted, the Court is not inclined to grant any further extensions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Bernardino v. Walmart, Inc.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Aug 17, 2023
2:23-cv-00823-JCM-NJK (D. Nev. Aug. 17, 2023)
Case details for

Bernardino v. Walmart, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:LUIS BERNARDINO, Plaintiff, v. WALMART INC., Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Aug 17, 2023

Citations

2:23-cv-00823-JCM-NJK (D. Nev. Aug. 17, 2023)